Tag Archives: civil service employee with ptsd having problems at work

FERS Medical Retirements: Future Uncertainties

Human beings love certainties; but in this cold and objective, dispassionate world, such certainties can rarely be relied upon.

Hume’s causation argument undermined any attempt to establish repetition as a basis for future events, precisely because X occurring the thousandth time gives us no concrete evidence that the next time will result in any causal reliability.

Probability theory aside, as Hume argued, there is missing any “necessary connection” which would establish a predictable nexus to extrapolate future reliability based upon prior life events.  Without that necessary connection, causal certainty can never be ascertained.— or so his argument goes.

Yet, we continue to rely upon future certainties regardless of such “conceptual proofs” to the contrary, for, what other choice do we have?  We cannot wander throughout our lives  without reliance upon some semblance of causal expectation, otherwise, we would be like newborn infants every day with no sense of security or stability.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal Service workers under FERS who suffer from an illness or injury which impacts their future certainty in their Federal or postal career, a large stumbling block is the uncertainty of being approved for a future medical retirement application.

Although there can never be a causal guarantee when it involves the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, you can increase the probability of a successful outcome if you are adequately represented by an experienced attorney.

Citing the proper and relevant case laws and formulating the most effective legal arguments will increase the probability for future success.  To that end, applying to OPM does not need to seem like reinventing the proverbial wheel every time, or like being that lost child wandering in the woods without any sense of security.

Contact a FERS Lawyer experienced in Federal Disability Law, and increase your chance for a more certain future, despite what Hume says.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill
Experienced lawyer exclusively representing Federal and Postal employees to secure their FERS Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

 

OPM Medical Disability Retirement: Effectiveness

What does it mean, to be “effective”?   The dictionary definition will always include some synchronicity between “outcome” and “desired result”, but can one still be effective if one falls short of the goal desired?

If a football team goes through an entire season with a perfect record, but loses in the first round of the playoffs, has it failed to achieve its mission of “effectiveness”?   Similarly, if an up-and-coming company places a milestone-goal of 1 Billion Dollars in sales by year’s end, but misses its mark just shy of it, has it failed to be “effective”?

One may, of course, conclude that such analogies don’t always apply, as it often depends as to whether or not the goal itself is an “all or nothing” desired end, as opposed to a spectrum upon which success or failure depends and where there are varying degrees of differences which may result in a wide range of relativity.

For Federal Gov. employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a disability, and where “effectiveness” is first gauged by looking at whether or not you can perform all of the basic elements of your job despite your ongoing medical conditions, the consideration as to whether it is time to initiate the process of filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS, must in the end depend upon multiple factors.

Are you becoming deficient in performance?  Have there been any “conduct” issues?  Is your attendance becoming less than satisfactory?  Do you have a doctor who is willing to support your case?

In the end, “effectiveness” in a Federal Disability Retirement application has only one (1) desired result:  An approval from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, under the FERS system.

In order to reach that desired result, contact a FERS Retirement Attorney who specializes in Federal Medical Retirement Law and let the synchronicity between “outcome” (an approval from OPM) and the “desired result” (early retirement based upon your medical condition) meet without a gap in between.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill
Lawyer exclusively representing Federal and Postal employees to secure their Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

 

Disability Retirement from Federal Gov. Employment: The Viable Argument

In this postmodern era, is there such a thing?  What was once illogical — or, even worse, absurd — is now considered an acceptable and viable argument.

Logical fallacies are accepted; non-sequiturs are fully embraced; whether or not the “middle term” is carried over from the major premise to the minor is irrelevant; and “just because” is nowhere blinked at, as the final conclusion to every argument these days is that “everyone is entitled to his or her opinion” and it matters not whether specific facts undermine a viewpoint expressed.

Thus, does it even make a difference whether or not an argument is “viable” enough?

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are considering filing for Federal Disability Retirement benefits from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management under FERS, an argument used in attempting to persuade OPM to approve your Federal Disability Retirement application is one which must appeal to the Statute, the Regulations, or to MSPB and/or Federal Circuit Court of Appeals Case-Law precedents.

Yes, there is still a distinction between an irrelevant, weak and inconsequential argument, and a viable one.  The viable argument is one based upon facts, the law, and an irrefutable delineation logical fortitude.  In order to make the viable argument, contact an OPM Disability Attorney who specializes in Federal Medical Retirement Law.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill
Lawyer exclusively representing Federal and Postal employees to secure their Federal Disability Retirement benefits under FERS from the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

 

Office of Personnel Management (OPM) Disability Retirement: Life’s Aporia

The classic example of “aporia” is the following: A Greek individual declares to the world, “All Greeks are liars”.  Is what he said a lie?  Or, is he excluded from the statement?  If all Greeks are liars, and the declaring individual is a Greek and is therefore lying, does that mean that all Greeks tell the truth?  Or is that a lie, as well?

Thus, the term indicates an internal self-contradiction, where the statement or declarative itself is inconsistent with itself.

It is like the Federal or Postal employee who can no longer perform one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job — there is an inconsistency between what the individual does, and his or her medical condition.  Thus, Federal Disability Retirement benefits were put in place in order to correct one of life’s Aporias — where an internal inconsistency and incompatibility exists.

Contact an OPM Disability Retirement Lawyer who specializes in OPM Medical Retirement Law, and begin the process of reversing life’s aporia by preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement case.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Lawyer

 

Permanent Disability Retirement from Federal Employment: SSDI & VA Claims

Corollary successes can have a persuasive impact upon an OPM Disability Retirement application — but one must also understand the difference between a “persuasive” impact as opposed to a “determinative” impact.

An approval of disability benefits from the Social Security Administration (SSDI) edges closer to a “determinative” one as to its impact upon a FERS Disability Retirement application.  Note the operative term, however — “edges”.  Under Trevan v. OPM, such an approval from SSDI — so long as the medical basis upon which it was filed is identical to, or fairly paralleling that submitted with the FERS Disability Retirement application — is strongly persuasive upon an OPM Disability Retirement claim.  However, it must still be argued, and certain elements of the SSDI Claim must be shown to OPM for that “persuasive” effect that “edges” towards a determinative impact.

VA Claims — even if you are deemed “Permanent and Total” — are closer to a “merely persuasive” influence upon a FERS Disability Retirement claim.  That is, the higher the ascribed percentage in a VA Disability claim, the greater the chance that it will influence or “persuade” OPM that the FERS Disability Retirement application should be approved.

Use of an SSDI or VA approval should be part of the legal strategy in filing a Federal Disability Retirement application under FERS.  Contact a private OPM Attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law and begin to prepare an effective Federal or Postal Disability Retirement application in order to determinatively persuade OPM to approve your case.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Federal Employee Disability Retirement Benefits: Succor

It is an unused word, likely because no one knows how to properly pronounce it, and even if it is pronounced properly, it would be misunderstood and thought to have either been misused or viewed as a blot against the user for attempting to insert a word in a conversation which nobody comprehends the meaning of, anyway.

It is a noun.  It is defined as providing “assistance in times of distress or hardship”, as in, “X gave succor to Y when he most needed it”, or some such similar usage and application.  Or: “The succor provided was inadequate”, or “Mary was succored by the community and greatly appreciated such kindness”.

Do words that never get used matter?  Why are there synonyms, and not just a single word describing a singular event or occurrence, and are there societies in which a 1-to-1 ratio of word-to-phenomenon is so unique as to never lack for clarity precisely because the reservation of a particular word has a singularity of meaning such that there can never be a deviation from its proper application?

Words have meanings — thus stated in the plural, we recognize that either in the subject or in the predicate, the multiplicity of applications can result in confusion.  How about the following: A single word has a particular meaning.  But that is not true; at least, not in the English language.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who are undergoing hardships because of a medical condition, such that consideration must be given to filing a Federal Disability Retirement application through OPM, seek the succor of an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law.  In other words: Look for guidance and counsel from an experienced attorney who knows the process of filing an effective OPM Disability Retirement application.

Why we need “other words” remains a mystery.

Sincerely,

Robert R.McGill, Esquire

 

Federal Employee Disability Retirement Benefits: Silence

Whether of the historical novel by Shusaku Endo or of the film adaptation by Martin Scorsese, the powerful images evoked (or provoked?) by the contrast between noise heard and the silence following can be felt only with the “before” and “after”.  The novel itself is Endo’s masterpiece, although he has written many; and, of course, Scorsese has a long list of accomplishments and commercial successes, but Silence is not one of them— at least not by commercial standards.

It is a serious movie with few bright moments; of contracted theological arguments and disputations revealing cultural chasms so deep that only a simple metaphor can make it comprehensible; of an agonizing series of endless torture; of the anguished, linguistic divide apparent between two countries which fail to understand each other because of the subtleties of language’s disconnect.  And then there is — silence — in contrast to noise; of a “before” and an “after”.

And the questions which foretell of the quietude: Does the lack of God’s intervention mean that there is no God?  Does “speaking” of denying and renouncing, or the act of stepping upon the image of God, determine one’s faith, or can faith be alive within the silence of one’s inner soul?  Can the Peter-like character, Kichijiro, remain a “faithful apostle” despite his breaking of his silence in actively renouncing and apostatizing?  And who has the greater faith — the priest who grudgingly passes judgment each time the apostate comes for confession and forgiveness, or the one who renounces but then confesses and asks?

In the end, Silence is too heavy a movie to be considered “entertainment”, and most people will not want to spend an evening watching a movie that has little joy and less to laugh about; for, the pain that is experienced by so many in this world in the silence of one’s own suffering is torturous enough without asking to view an even greater expansion of such pain and silence.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who, similarly, suffer in silence because of a medical condition that prevents the Federal or Postal worker from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, it may be time to consider preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be filed through the U.S. Office of Personnel Management.

Consulting and being guided by an attorney who specializes in Federal Disability Retirement Law is likely the wiser course to take, as the bureaucratic morass that one must be guided through can be likened to the foreign country that the priests in Silence had to endure — through the pitfalls of dangers and caverns of unknown territories.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

 

Lawyer for Federal Disability Retirement claims: Fact and opinion

These days, the distinction between the two has been almost completely lost.  One must qualify such a statement with “almost”, only because there may still be minority bastions and pockets of hope still holding out that the madness prevailing will someday be overcome.

Somehow, the lines bifurcating the distinction that once were so obvious became obscured, until suddenly it was no longer a matter of just blurry lines, but the lines themselves had disappeared, and no one spoke as if there was a difference to be had.  Facts were confirmed and established “somethings” in either the objective world or of tradition-laden statements that we could all agree upon; opinions were various interpretations of those commonly-accepted facts, interspersed with the subjective content that often prefaced with, “It is my opinion that…”.

We have now discarded even the prefatory admonition, now, because it has become an unnecessary addendum; since there are no longer any facts, and everyone is privileged to hold an opinion, we go ahead and speak not facts because our opinion holds out just as well, thank you very much.

Where did it all begin?  Was it because Plato made too much about the difference between reality and appearance — so much so that he was forced to manufacture his conceptual fiction of ethereal “Forms” that itself became so problematic?  Or was it with Descartes, where certainty of one’s own existence became relegated to the subjective “I”, and so it was bound to become a muddle as more and more philosophers came to realize that, like Russell’s muse about language and the destruction of the traditional correspondence theory of truth, statements made could not so easily be identified as either fact or opinion.

It becomes much more problematic when statutory, reputation, education and logical methodology are altogether discarded and made irrelevant, and so we come back full circle in questioning ourselves, the categorizations we have imposed, and how to get beyond the conundrum of modernity’s own making.

For Federal employees and U.S. Postal workers who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal job or Postal position, the question concerning “fact or opinion” is an important one, because the weaving of one into the other is queried in Standard Form 3112A, Applicant’s Statement of Disability.

How one’s answers are formulated and presented; whether they can be verified, established, “backed up with facts” as opposed to being left as mere subjective opinions — are all bundled up and contained within the questions asked, and how you will be answering them.

Fortunately, there is still remaining an approach and methodology of presenting facts as facts, and setting aside opinions and interpretations of the facts, and in preparing, formulating and filing an effective Federal Disability Retirement application, to be filed with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, it is important to recognize the difference still, and be cautious in completing SF 3112A in light of modernity’s obsessional disorientation on the difference between fact and opinion.

Just the facts, as stated by my opinion.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire

Federal Disability Retirement: Just another bystander

There are primary characters, ancillary or peripheral personalities – and just another bystander.  Similarly, in personal relationships taken from a subjective “I” viewpoint, there are “close family members” (i.e., normally identified as the core within a nuclear family), “extended family”, and then there are “friends and acquaintances” — and just pure strangers.  Of course, the Internet, Facebook and other electronic devices have somewhat changed and altered the landscape of such relational directions, but we still know what it means to generally be “just another bystander”: to be out of the proverbial “loop” and perhaps observe, but otherwise uninvolved in the lives of those around, passing by or in the midst of a crisis developing.

Thus, when an accident occurs, a tragedy unfolds or a crisis develops, there are those who are referred to as “just another bystander”.  Or, if by tragic circumstances, that “bystander” becomes a victim either by happenstance or through “collateral” damage wrought upon surrounding neighborhoods, people, etc., we may refer to that person as an “innocent bystander” – as if the imputed adjective adds something more appropriate to engender empathy or description of haphazard events by which people can be randomly hurt.

Or, if intervention or interference imposes upon a situation by events unfolding, such an identification may be referred to in the past tense, as in, “He was just another bystander when event X occurred, and then he ran into the melee and helped the victims by…” In other words, by becoming “involved”, person X absolved himself by his very actions and thereby negated his prior status as a “bystander”, innocent or not.

The fact is, most of us are bystanders for most days of our lives; we walk through neighborhoods, streets and buildings inhabited by others, where others are engaging in commerce, relationships and interaction of daily living, and others, as well, are mere bystanders as they walk past us and bypassing our subjective interludes.  We expect others to maintain that status unless otherwise needed, and we retain with comfort such status in the courteous behavior towards strangers otherwise unnecessary for further interaction.  The problem becomes when we become bystanders within the role of our own lives.

For Federal and Postal employees who suffer from a medical condition, such that the medical condition prevents the Federal or Postal employee from performing one or more of the essential elements of one’s Federal or Postal job, remaining a bystander when it is necessary to become an integral part in determining your own future is often a problem of self-will.  Watching the lives of others pass by is one thing; watching your own life pass by means that you are just another bystander when being a bystander is not the appropriate role to play.

Filing a Federal Disability Retirement application, whether the Federal or Postal employee is under FERS, CSRS or CSRS Offset, is often the necessary next and proactive step in determining the future outcome of events unfolding. The medical condition you suffer from is already the “event”; what you do next will determine whether you are the primary character or a bystander – or, worse, an “innocent bystander” who then is referred to in the past tense.

Sincerely,

Robert R. McGill, Esquire